Measure Strength Institutionalization and Political System

6

2. Measure Strength Institutionalization and Political System

Studies on the party system has developed quite rapidly every year. Some experience of the countries of Latin America, Africa, Middle East, Europe, the Soviet Union tried to measure the strength of the institutionalization of the political party system has produced weaknesses in community participation, accountability elections and uncertainty for voters and the elite 6 . The weak institutionalization of a system that can create barriers to the consolidation of democracy and a new democratic transition. The experience of Russia and Ukraine both a weak state in the institutionalization of the party, this is due to the absence of party discipline in parliament. There are four problems identified weaknesses in the institutional system of the party. First, basically weak party support patterns still tend to be stable 7 , however, new regulations often appear and disappear with regularity. Voter support was often changed substantially from election to election. Secondly, the behavior and the weak party activists in building consolidation with the citizens, constituent relations become brittle, making it difficult making the arrangement themselves and articulate the interests of citizens in popular preference. other than that voters had difficulty identifying themselves to a particular political party. Third legitimacy of the actors on the political parties to be low compared with the institutionalized system 8 . Thus democracy governed and developed by the interested parties alone, and the party is just an extension of individual leaders or political elite only, therefore the support of the people is indispensable. Such organizations do not have the tools and power autonomously can be developed to establish the partys relationship with voters. When the party institution is weak, then it would become dysfunctional oversight, and tough sanctions to politicians or party cadres in parliament, because the party was not able to maintain the institutional party, at least not just accost any effort. Uncertainty prevention behaviors board members involved in such cases of corruption depends on the stability of the active voter response, because the actors do not have information that requires strategic behavior, which in turn will raise the stakes in the election race for the future and are not interested in keeping the democratic behavior. Case parties in Indonesia could be a picture similar to what is 6 Thames, T. Frank, “ Dicipline and Party Institutionalization Post Soviet Legislatures”, Vol 3 no 4, Sage Publication, 2007, pp. 457 7 Mainwaring, Scott ,Rethinking Party Systems in the Third Wave of Democratization. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1999. 83 8 Mainwaring, 121 7 experienced by Russia and Ukraine, for good institutional management will significantly influence the political system strong impact on the party and the state system.

3. The Party System Institutionalization and Legislative Behavior.